You are here

Commencement Address of Honorable Aquilino Q. Pimentel Jr.

November 20, 2018

share this

Ladies and gentlemen.

First, my thanks to our most distinguished President of the Ateneo de Manila University, Fr. Jett Villarin, S.J., and the Dean, Faculty Members, Officials and Staff of the Ateneo de Manila University School of Government for their kind invitation for me to participate in this momentous event in the lives, particularly, of the graduates this year of the Ateneo School of Government.

Momentous because this afternoon after you have donned your togas and received your diplomas, you are no longer the same individuals that you were when you started your studies in this preeminent institution of learning.

You have, in effect, already attained the “upward mobility” that education bestows on those who seek it.

What is, important now, I think is that while you are probably feeling that your heads are knocking against the clouds, it may be best that you keep feet firmly planted on the ground, on this planet earth, and particularly, in this land of our birth, the Republic of the Philippines.

Otherwise, you would be tempted to think only about yourself, and enjoy the blessings of your education solely for your benefit without any care for our less fortunate fellow citizens.

And that kind of an attitude, I submit, would contribute to the proliferation of what the Bol-anons condemn as “idya idya, aho aho” mentality, or what may be loosely translated as “what is yours is yours, what is mine is mine.”

And certainly, that kind of disposition would run counter to our Christian tenet that we are our brothers’ keepers.

Your kind invitation suggests that I share some specific examples of what I might have done as a public servant, which may be of some use by those who are or might wish to serve in government.

Hence, I will now try to discuss some things that I did as the Mayor of Cagayan de Oro City in the ‘80s that may prove relevant to your expectations.

Hopefully, the narration will show following good principles to guide public officials in the advancement of the welfare of their constituents it is not that easy. But it can be done.

Example One:
How we solved the problem of the arbitrary withholding by Macalacañang of the salaries of some City Hall employees in the ‘80s

Example Two:
How we dealt with a recalcitrant lot owner affected by a road widening plan of the city.

Example Three:
How we converted offers to stipend for the Mayor into a Scholarship Fund;

Example Four:
How our administration’s refusal to receive commissions in the city’s purchase of some dump trucks reduced the actual purchase price of the said dump trucks, and

Example Five:
How dealing with the city’s constituents directly rather than through conduits produced better rapport between the city government and its constituents.

But even if the incidents we have just discussed may inspire other public officials to do likewise in the performance of their duties, I suggest that, perhaps, it may even be more important for them to anchor the faithful performance of their public duties on the good, effective and proven practices in public service. For when they do, they will certainly widen the avenue for serving the people faithfully and well.

Basically, those practices, among other things, demand that public officials must:

Be open and accessible to their constituents.

Advance people’s welfare, not line their pockets with gold;

Persuade – not force – people – to help in the delivery of good governance;

Keep time in their appointments, and

Use love of country and people as the basic reason for their being in public office.

To place the events we are discussing in proper perspective, it may be apt to remember that at the time when I was the elected Mayor of Cagayan de Oro, the Local Government Code had not yet been enacted. Moreover, Marcos, even then, despite his proclamation that he had lifted martial rule, still retained some authoritarian powers.

Thus, local officials had to make do with what was allowed by the Central Government in the matter of local governance. But, if they had “good partisan connections” with higher officials of the Central Government, then, they could obtain more favorable treatment for their constituencies from national government agencies.First Principle:
The first principle in our list obliges public officials to be open and accessible to their constituents.

In line, they must make their constituents feel welcome into their offices whether they come bearing happy tidings or worrisome

As an indispensable part of their openness and accessibility, public officials should make use of free media.

Media involvement in the dissemination of vital information relative to public affairs is absolutely necessary in this time and age.

Perhaps, it is relevant to mention that roughly eight days ago, the Internet contended that our country has, at least, “47 unsolved killings of journalists since 2008.”

Further, it alleged that the statistics includes the ambush of local news publisher, Dennis Denora, who was shot “while driving his car through Panabo City, Daval del Norte in June 2018”, and the infamous “attack against journalist in (Philippine) history, the 2009 Maguindanao massacre, which took the lives of at least 34 media workers.”

Up to this very hour, we all know that the case is still being tried in court.

As consequence, the Philippines is listed as one of the top five countries in the world “with the poorest accountability records (in protecting journalists),” the other four being (1) Somalia, (2) Syria, (3) Iraq and (4) Sudan.

For the record, that allegation was attributed to “the Committee to Protect Journalists”, which is supposedly an outlet of the Asia Pacific Human Resources (APHR) organization.

But to go back to our topic, what is important is that under a democratic government, fair and responsible media are kept free to inform our people of what is going on in government, and prevent the authorities from falling into the temptation of imposing authoritarian rule.

Keeping the people duly informed about how their government is being run is essential, vital and indispensable to democratic governance. For as an academician once said: “good governance does not depend on the governors alone but on the governed as well.”

Thus, considering present day circumstances, where the Internet provides easy, public and transparent dissemination of information, it may be best for all government agencies – national as well as local – to adopt it as a normal and bureaucratic way of making government records accessible to the public.

Government agencies should also probably be compelled to have the equivalents of Facebook accounts, twitters, or Social Media facilities to inform the public – with dispatch – about what they are doing as the people’s servants.

And that, aside, from having their public records readily accessible to the reporters of the regular mass media: radio, tv and print.

To ensure that vital information about government performance is freely disseminated throughout the land, I propose that all public officials – and the people – must openly and consciously uphold, in their respective areas of operation, the freedom of speech and of the press that is mandated in our Constitution.

In practical terms, that means that the right of our people to speak out their minds freely on any subject under the sun and anywhere within the territory of our Republic must be duly respected without any kind of censorship or even of official permission that might inhibit its practice.

Of course, the right of government to deter people’s advocating defiance of the law, rebellion or secession or the commission of any criminal offense must remain in place as it is today. Or people’s intruding into the right of the State to preserve matters of national security.

Nonetheless, the right of people to free speech and assembly must always be respected by the authorities. Ant that includes the right of responsible media outlets to gather news or cover news worthy events anywhere in the country without any undue interference or curtailment by the authorities.

Those freedoms, notwithstanding, however, the Government retains the right to restrict the movements of people, including media practitioners, in places where sensitive military or police operations are on-going, like areas that are directly affected by rebellion, insurgency or other violent acts.

Now, let us discuss how public officials should at in the face of adversity? Man-made or otherwise?

The first thing that I suggest is for them to pray – if they know how to do so.

But if, unfortunately, they do not know how to invoke the aid of Divine Providence under those circumstances, they have no choice but to keep their cool.

Losing their temper or getting angry as a reaction to provocations form any source will hurt the officials concerned more than the object(s) of their ire.

And, they should go to court only if necessary.

For, sadly, in this country, the speedy Justice that is mandated by the Constitution to be delivered to court litigants is more of a hallucination than a reality.

Nonetheless, public officials should never categorize those who oppose their plans and programs – as “enemies”.

For they are not really “enemies”. They are simply political “opponents”.

In Tagalog, “katunggali” or in Visayan, “kaatbang”.

In fact, in the more advanced democracies, a discussant normally addresses his or her adversary in public discussions – as “my worthy opponent”.

By defining people who hold opposite political views as “opponents”, political personalities contribute to the lowering of the level of their antagonisms against one another even if they belong to contending political aggrupments.

For words have meanings. And if those in public offices would consider those opposing them as “enemies”, it is easy to imagine that sooner than later, they could wind up killing one another.

Political adversaries or opponents, however, need not slay one another even if their positions might drastically differ on matters of public interest.

In fact, our criminal laws prohibit homicide or murder; the killing of other human beings. Or even causing them physical injuries.

Indeed, our country even now bans the execution of criminals.

But even if there are no man-made laws condemning the killing of our fellow human beings, for us believers, the Ten Commandments given by the Lord to Moses, should be enough inhibition against taking away of the lives of other human beings, even of those who vehemently disagree with us.

Second Principle: Public Officials Must Advance the people’s welfare, not line their pockets with gold.

Public officials should always be conscious of the fact that they hold positions of power because the sovereign will of the people placed them there.

The people, then, are their masters whose will they must follow as public servants.

And for one purpose alone: to serve the best interests of the people, never to enrich themselves with ill-gotten wealth.

Public officials, therefore, have no choice: they must be service oriented. That is, to do good for the well-being of the community that put them in public office.

That is why public service is called in Spanish, or in Tagalog or even in Visayan, “servicio publico”.

Public officials are in government to serve the best interests of their constituents; not to enrich themselves or their families or anyone for that matter.

While it may be clear that outright thievery in public service is proscribed, what about bribery?

The Revised Penal Code already penalizes bribery in whatever manner of form it is committed, directly or indirectly. But the manipulative ways by which ingenious briber-givers would couch their operations in enticing packages remain practically inexhaustible.

Bribe-givers are not so gross as to say outright that they are offering public officials money or things to do them favors.

More often the not, influence peddlers would frame their insidious intent in palatable terms to make their offers attractive to the targeted public officials.

For instance, they would insist that they merely want to enable the public officials concerned to cope with the multifarious demands that people make on their offices.

An Example

When I was newly elected as Mayor of Cagayan de Oro, I received feelers from some business people who wanted to grant me a “monthly stipend” ostensibly to help tide me over the financial demands on my office that may be covered by official appropriations.

Additionally, I found it absolutely essential that for the people’s money to be properly used, the funds must be: (1) appropriated by law or by ordinance to advance the welfare of the people, and (2) subjected to appropriate auditing by the Commission on Audit.

And equally important, to show that the public officials concerned are not hiding anything from public view, the pertinent records of how the funds are to be or were spent must be made reasonably accessible for scrutiny by the people.

Over dramatic?

Perhaps, it was a bit over dramatic, but in my tenure as Mayor of my city, I had billboards installed in public places that specified project sites; their costs; their winning contractor(s), and the time frames within which the projects are to be accomplished.

That was, of course, at the time, when the Internet was not yet as commonly used as it is today.

Perhaps, today, when the omnipresent Internet eye seems to be looking down on anything and everything, there may no longer be any need for that obsolescent manner of using billboards to inform the public about what our government agencies – local or national – are doing for the people at any given time.

In any case, the people of Cagayan de Oro City, were, thus, welcome and free to see the records for themselves and to avail of remedies the law placed their reach should they feel the need to do so.

Another Example

There was another instance when bidders for the city’s acquisition of dump trucks insinuated through their emissaries that the office of the mayor could “get a commensurate commission” if the bids were approved as tendered.

I responded publicly that the bidders should do for the good for the city was to reduce their bids to their lowest by deducting therefrom whatever they had intended to give to City Hall as a “commensurate commission.”

I also made sure that all of them understood that they would have to abide by the rules on bidding, where lowest bidder would get the award as provided by law.

The city, then, proceeded with the public bidding. And the bidders offered their competitive “lowest bids” to the city for the dump trucks.

Ultimately, the trucks were bought at the lowest possible price then obtaining in the market at the time.

Detractors

On the side, I must admit that I had my share of detractors who filed concocted charges against me not only to prevent me from implementing projects that were envisioned for the welfare of our people but to oust me from office.

Naturally, as best I could, I fought against those malicious machinations. Not by the use of force or intimidation but by availing of legal remedies under the Constitution and the laws of the land.

In my view, public officials must respond – in accordance with law to all kinds of accusations – right or wrong – deserved or underserved – coming from and all sectors of our society.

Third Principle: Persuade, Do Not Force People

And as a general rule, when public officials wish to convince others that what they intend to – or actually – do is good for their constituents, they should use the force of persuasion; not the suasion of force.

Forth Principle: Keep Time
The basic theme I wanted all city hall employees to understand was that: Time has no color. Time is the same for the white or black or brown races.

There is no such thing as Filipino time.

When a function is set for a definite time and a public official agrees to attend it, he or she should be there on time.

A public official should never keep people waiting.

The people’s time is as precious as that of the public official’s.

And time waits for no man or woman.

In line, I also tried to make sure that I never let people wait unnecessarily for me.

For people wanting to see me at my office, for instance, I followed a general rule: “first-come, first-in”. Unless their appointments were set in advance for us to meet on a fixed time.

Otherwise, even on matters that demand official attention, discrimination against the less connected would continue to be the name of the game.

Fifth Principle: Love as basis for public service

And the fifth principle that people in public service ought to use to promote public welfare must be none other than love of country and people.

This advocacy is best exemplified; I submit by the exemplary lives of two outstanding human beings who by words and deeds typified what credible leadership means.

I refer to Mathama Gandhi, who incidentally was never elected to public office, but whose struggles in life galvanized the people of India to fight for their freedom non-violently.

Among other things, Gandhi is known for his wise adage: “There go my people. I must follow them because I am their leader.”

In my view, the saying was meant to convey the idea that people who want to lead others must always be conscious of and concerned with the essential aspirations of their constituents.

Otherwise, the would-be-leader might end up alienated from the needs of his people and therefore, useless, unwanted, and irrelevant.

Then, there is Mother Teresa, who taught the world that wealth or affluence is not an indispensable requirement for people to serve others.

She summed up her guiding principle of life in these simple terms: “If you cannot feed one hundred, feed one.”

In line, I interpret Mother Teresa’s thesis to mean that human beings give meaning and purpose to their existence not by espousing impossible dreams but doable, practical, and achievable ones.

And finally, as a Christian, I believe that the best example any leader ever showed the world was the act of our Lord, Jesus Christ, who washed the feet of his disciples.

Humility

In line, the Good Lord was teaching his disciples that to qualify as genuine servants of the people, humility must become an indispensable aspect of their lives so that they would truly become the servants, not the masters of the people.

But where are these principles found?

I respectfully suggest that the 10 Commandments of the Lord contain the basic, fundamental and irreplaceable source document for public officials to fulfill their sworn duties to promote the public good.

The Bhagavad Gita and the Shariah may also have similar injunctions for public officials to follow.

But I will limit myself to advocating what I am more familiar with: the Ten Commandments that the Jesuits seared into my life when I was a freshman in high school in the early ‘50s.

But how could the 10 Commandments shape the direction of a believer’s life in public service?

To emphasize, let me repeat in simple terms, first by the concerned public officials’ loving God with all their hearts, minds, souls and strength. And, then, by loving their neighbors as themselves.

In more prosaic terms, when individuals are rewarded with the opportunity to serve our people in government, their love for public service should be translated into promoting the general welfare of the people not only in terms of security, but of employment and good governance under a balanced ecology and with freedom and liberty, as well as justice and peace for all.

It is now time to say thank you for your patience in listening to his monologue.

I can only hope and pray that you, as graduates of this illustrious institution, the Ateneo School of Government, would use the blessings that you have received not only for your individuals benefits but for the good of our country and people.